VEGA AS4161 : 64-bit High performance Quad core Microprocessor, RISC-V based

[Bombastinator]

51 minutes ago, porina said:

The main point I was trying to make was that there are rules in place for trademarks, and at the end of the day it is up to the legal system to decide where the lines are and if they have been crossed. I don't claim to understand it well enough to say if AMD should or need to take any action because of it, or if the new CPU should or shouldn't have used Vega also.

Except it only sort of is.  If Nvidia doesn’t bring suit no one else will.  If it DOES, then and only then, the legal system will form an opinion based on what Nvidia says, and anyone else involved.  If later Nvidia does bring suit on someone else, and they turn around and say “but they let risc-v do it” then there is another thing. “Nvidia could simply reply that it was a totally different market though.    What I think may be the cheapest way out for risc-v is for them to pay some sort of nominal license fee, like a dollar or something, that covers the asses of both companies. 

Edited August 29, 2022 by Bombastinator

[porina]

18 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

What I think may be the cheapest way out for risc-v is for them to pay some sort of nominal license fee, like a dollar or something, that covers the asses of both companies. 

Any potential fall out from using Vega is nothing to do with RISC-V though. The product called Vega is a processor implementation from a company, who'll be responsible.

 

Licensing is certainly an option. Like iOS trademark is actually owned by Cisco and licenced by Apple. I only found out that a few years ago.

[igormp]

On 8/28/2022 at 5:15 AM, snappercayt said:

Summary

VEGA AS4161 : 64-bit High performance Quad core Microprocessor

Quotes

My thoughts

 Quad core, based on RISC-V, has Arduino Shield compatible board like ARIES v2.0 (more info here) what is not to like here? not much talk about it anywhere, I hope LTT picks it up and can promote this young venture so it can get some test samples out in the wild for more tinkerers.

Sources

1. video link 

2. the website link https://vegaprocessors.in/dhanush64.html

 

I couldn't find anywhere to buy a dev board for those CPUs. Anyhow, something like a StarFive's VisionFive, Allwinner’s Nezha (the one I have) or even a MangoPi should be better platforms that the SBCs based on that Indian CPU.

 

2 hours ago, Bombastinator said:

But one is a gpu for x86 and one is a cpu that is not.  I suspect this will come down to whether Nvidia feels they are too close.

A GPU is not ISA dependent, you can run a Vega GPU with that Vega CPU without problems.

 

On 8/28/2022 at 6:44 AM, porina said:

On the chip itself, will see how it goes. I would love to have a desktop level RISC-V system to play. Given even initial Pi could run desktop Linux, something similar to that would suffice.

There are existing risc-v SBCs that run linux already, I have one in my hands with a D1 CPU.

 

21 hours ago, Brooksie359 said:

Well I mean apple isn't exactly a unique name but that doesn't change the fact that if you try and name something apple in the tech industry you would get sued immediately. 

1- I don't see how that naming discussing is any way relevant to the topic itself.

2- Why would AMD care about a CPU using a similar name to a GPU lineup that they aren't even really using anymore?

3- The Ampere example is pretty similar to that Vega naming thing, and nor Nvidia nor Ampere had any problems.

[Bombastinator]

1 hour ago, igormp said:

I couldn't find anywhere to buy a dev board for those CPUs. Anyhow, something like a StarFive's VisionFive, Allwinner’s Nezha (the one I have) or even a MangoPi should be better platforms that the SBCs based on that Indian CPU.

 

A GPU is not ISA dependent, you can run a Vega GPU with that Vega CPU without problems.

 

There are existing risc-v SBCs that run linux already, I have one in my hands with a D1 CPU.

 

1- I don't see how that naming discussing is any way relevant to the topic itself.

2- Why would AMD care about a CPU using a similar name to a GPU lineup that they aren't even really using anymore?

3- The Ampere example is pretty similar to that Vega naming thing, and nor Nvidia nor Ampere had any problems.

Not sure how that disagrees with what I said or if it even did

[igormp]

22 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

Not sure how that disagrees with what I said or if it even did

- The issue (which is not even an issue IMO) would be between AMD and the Indian company named Vega, not Nvidia (which you mentioned in your post).

- You said more than once that those GPUs only run on x86, I was just correcting that misinformation, since you can run those in any ISA that has proper support for the GPU's drivers, be it POWER, ARM or Risc-V.

 

The "issue" with Nvidia was an example another user mentioned with the company Ampere, which produces ARM chips.

[Bombastinator]

5 minutes ago, igormp said:

- The issue (which is not even an issue IMO) would be between AMD and the Indian company named Vega, not Nvidia (which you mentioned in your post).

- You said more than once that those GPUs only run on x86, I was just correcting that misinformation, since you can run those in any ISA that has proper support for the GPU's drivers, be it POWER, ARM or Risc-V.

 

The "issue" with Nvidia was an example another user mentioned with the company Ampere, which produces ARM chips.

If vega is an Indian company and they sell only in India it would fall under Indian jurisdiction which makes the whole thing even less likely I suspect.  I have no idea how specifically Indian jurisprudence works.  All I know is it has large numbers of aspects of Victorian era british law, but has long since gone off in its own direction.